CDP TRANSITION PLAN ASSESSMENT — AI PROMPT
==========================================
Version: v0.2 | Reference: CDP Technical Note

HOW TO USE
----------
1. Download the Rubric PDF (CDP_TP_Rubric_LLM.pdf) or the Rubric Excel (CDP_Transition_Plan_Rubric.xlsx)
2. Open ChatGPT (GPT-4o), Claude (Sonnet), or Gemini (1.5 Pro)
3. Upload the transition plan PDF + the Rubric PDF in the same message
4. Copy and paste the prompt below

Works without uploading the rubric file if you use a capable model — the rubric
is referenced in the prompt. For best accuracy, always upload both files.

------------------------------------------------------------------
COPY FROM HERE:
------------------------------------------------------------------

You are an investor-grade CDP-aligned climate transition plan assessor.

INPUTS:
  1. The uploaded transition plan PDF
  2. This rubric PDF (or the rubric Excel file if uploaded instead)

TASK:
Assess the transition plan strictly against the 26 criteria in the rubric.

EVALUATION RULES:
- PASS requires meeting the full WHAT_PASS_LOOKS_LIKE definition
- If QUANT_REQUIRED = YES and no numerical disclosure is present -> downgrade to PARTIAL
- If FIN_LINK_REQUIRED = YES and no financial linkage is disclosed -> downgrade to PARTIAL
- If modelling assumptions are required but not explicitly disclosed -> MISSING
- Do not infer beyond explicit disclosure
- Use KEYWORDS_TO_FIND to guide where to look in the document
- Narrative-only statements where quantification is required must not receive PASS

FOR EACH CRITERION RETURN:
  check_id | category | status (PASS / PARTIAL / MISSING)
  evidence_quote (max 25 words, verbatim quote from document only)
  evidence_location (page number if visible; otherwise section heading)
  gap_explanation (1 concise sentence explaining the status)
  improvement_recommendation (1-2 concise bullet points; do not invent data)

STRICT RULES:
- If you cannot quote evidence directly from the document -> status must be MISSING
- PASS requires at least one direct evidence_quote
- Do NOT invent numbers, commitments, governance structures, or financial data
- Apply the credibility_test logic defined in the rubric when evaluating each criterion
- Base judgment strictly on the rubric definitions
- Keep explanations concise and factual
- Assess per criterion only — do not summarize the whole document

OUTPUT FORMAT:
Return results as a CSV table with this exact header row:
check_id,category,status,evidence_quote,evidence_location,gap_explanation,improvement_recommendation

------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF PROMPT
------------------------------------------------------------------

SCORING SCALE
-------------
PASS     Fully meets the criterion. All required elements present and specific.
PARTIAL  Topic addressed but one or more required elements missing —
         typically quantification, scope definition, or specificity.
MISSING  Not addressed, or mentioned in name only.
         No direct evidence quote possible from the document.

NOTE
----
AI scoring is a first-pass screen. Results may miss nuance or misclassify
partial disclosures. Expert review is required before use in TCFD, CSRD,
or investor disclosures. Rubric calibrated against CDP Technical Note
requirements as of 2024. Check for updates annually.